The leak-proof White House is telling reporters--on background--that the administration is souring on Ariel Sharon. Who are these rogues?

YESTERDAY, in Madrid, the American Secretary of State virtually obliterated the distinction between terrorists and those fighting terrorists: "I think we are all in agreement and the world is in agreement that the solution will not be produced by terror or a response to terror." Quite a departure from the Bush Administration's response to September 11.

Later in the day, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer joined in the holiday from moral judgment. He said that the murderous suicide bomb attack in Haifa, in which eight Israelis were killed and a dozen others wounded, somehow underscored "the need for all parties to step back, for Israel to withdraw, and for the Palestinians and the Arabs to stop the violence, stop the killing." How wonderfully even-handed (even as it ignores the fact that the terrorist attacks against Israel have declined significantly since the Israeli military offensive began).

Administration officials speaking anonymously to reporters went further. "U.S. officials" told CNN White House correspondent John King Tuesday night that the ambush of Israeli military forces in the West Bank "would not have happened had Prime Minister Sharon heeded the president's advice and pulled back his troops." In other words, if Israelis die fighting terrorism, it is their fault for fighting back and for not heeding the American president's warning.

In fact, some senior White House officials seem to have launched a campaign against the national unity government of Ariel Sharon. The Washington Post quoted "administration sources" saying support for Sharon was "eroding . . . inside the White House." These "senior White House aides are beginning to express doubts about whether the Israeli leader can be a long-term partner in achieving the administration's goals in the Middle East."

These "senior White House aides" may be unaware that the current Israeli military operation has the overwhelming support of Israeli people across the political spectrum. But in any case, isn't it rather extraordinary, at a time when Secretary Powell is reaching out his hand to "Chairman" Arafat, that White House officials are now suggesting they would like to see the elected prime minister of Israel out of office?

Which leads to the question: Who are these "senior White House aides"? For months we've been reading about the unprecedented discipline of this White House--how no one speaks to the press without authorization. So we can safely assume that only the highest officials in the White House could be making statements with such significant policy implications. People at the level of, say, Andrew Card, Karl Rove, Karen Hughes, Condoleezza Rice, and Ari Fleischer.

Is it really the case that "regime change" in Israel is now administration policy? If not, these officials may want to publicly dispel the impression left by "senior White House aides."

Once again, we see Kristol's tactic. He criticizes Bush and puts forth a policy which is the most belligerent, appeals to the more emotional and volatile segments of the right, and stands back to watch the divisions appear.

Another HateIsraelFirst national socialist diatribe ? Sorry, I'm not a compassionate conservative.

I am an American My capital was attacked. I want total and complete war against all terrorists like Bush said in the beginning before he lost his nerve. No compromise No weakness No treason Total victory and utter defeat before millions of our citizens and those of our allies perish.

I remember the bodies falling from the WTC. Don't share your Islamic propaganda with me.

You can believe what you want, but that Washington Post article never mentioned anything about who wrote the Article in question. We were talking about the Weekly Standard post by Kistol. Where I said he is an assh*le and I stand by that.

Where do you get Islamic propaganda, I have stated numerous times that the Arab nations are pushing this terror you idiot. How does my saying we need to look out for the USA first make me a Jew hater. What a hateful, ignorant, emotional wreck you seem to be, take your pills that I am sure you've been prescribed and get a grip on reality. I've said the same thing over and over and yet you seem to not be able to comprehend simple English, isnt it past your bedtime?

Eager to have all-out war, are you? Have you visited the recruiter yet?

Yep, have you ?

Bush hasn't sold out anyone. Weinberg and Powell are right, in a sense. The suicide bombers are naive, brainwashed young people. The true evil lies in the people who formulate this policy and convince them to do this.

You should have been a defense attorney for Nazi concentration camp guards.

Powell is the Secretary of State. He does what the President tells him to do.

Which is why Bush is without excuse.

The President's FIRST priority is the safety and security of the American people, as he has said numerous times.

It should be. I don't believe it is. He has exhibited incredible weakness and put us more at risk these last few weeks.

He is not in charge of Israeli policy, nor is Israel his first priority, and rightly so. Besides making sure that Iraq doesn't attack us, Bush also has about a thousand other things to consider, including the reaction of allies, military strength, dangers from China and others who woul profit from our getting entangled in a Mideast War, and the perfidy of the democrats.

It seems you have forgotten that we have already been attacked and are at war. Sorry if this hurts 401ks and contracts with the House of Saud. We'll get over it.

Your desire for a World War II type scenario is not going to happen.

I know, we don't have the leadership any more.

You were told this at the beginning...that this was a war unlike any other, that it would take a long time, that many actions would be unseen. Now you are griping because you don't understand everything happening, and you are assigning base motives to the people who are doing the heavy lifting.

We were told alot of things about terrorism. Bush lied. He is a hypocrite, albeit an opportunistic hypocrite.

One other thing..you as much as called Presidient Bush and his dad antisemitic. That is an absolute lie.

You are so tranparent and amusing. Make up your own words and then call them a lie. No debate experience under your belt or whatever you wear ?

Bush's father chose the House of Saud over the House of Jacob. His son is walking the same path. I don't want him to, but he doesn't listen to me. He listens to his father when he should listen to his Father.

you are assigning base motives to the people who are doing the heavy lifting.

Your reply is excellent! There seems to be alot of BS flying around on this subject. The fact is that some of these so called conservatives are not really conservatives at all. Some may have voted for Bush as the lesser of two evils but they won't support him or his administration.

They blindly attack Powell, Ashcroft, and Bush as if they were talking about Barney Frank or Bill Clinton with little or no thought as to what they are saying. The tell tale words, "the Constitution", seem to be somewhere in their rants.

It's nice to see some sense typed out in this forum once and a while. Thanks!

This is the same as accusing them of antisemitism, and it is a false and malicious charge. To say that I am making up words is pretty foolish, when yours are there for all to see.

In fact, I will go on to ask you why you use the term "House of Jacob," which in case you didn't know it was a euphemism used by antisemitic types in earlier centuries.

You have NO idea what is going on behind the scenes. None. Neither do I, but at least I don't get on the computer and rant about things of which I am not informed.

Any speculation that I do is based on my knowledge of the character of the parties involved. You, on the other hand, seem inclined to make blanket statements of pseudo-fact and throw in a few insults to help your case along.

So, where did I learn my debating? I learned in school and in my life experience, which included people who taught me to not jump to conclusions and to always be civil.

The planet is not as simple as you believe. Rash actions often have unintended consequences. If you're suggestions were implemented at this point in time, the results would be global in it's effect and likely start the big one.

We need to avoid a global calamity if possible and that is exactly what Bush is doing. If he fails then your options will likely be on the table. My support for this attempt is 100%.

I look at my kids now and wonder if they will be still fighting this battle after I am gone. We owe them the chance to live in comfort and without fear. Let's give Powell some rope and see if he can get something going. If it all goes to hell then we will deal with it! OK?

you are Kristol arent you? otherwise i dont know how anyone could defend that two-faced slime bag. or are you johnny mccrazy, in which case i could understand your ramblings, but once again, take your pills and quit calling everyone else names in which you seem to have aquired rightly for yourself

You are slick but transparent. I wrote those comments about George I and Weinberger, which is evident from their careers, choices, and associations. You applied it to George II and tried to call foul. The jury is still out on his presidency, which is headed down at the moment, in great crisis.

You rememember George I's right hand man James Baker don't you ?

Both George I and Weinberger were on TV this week arguing the House of Saud's case. Say, the PLO has some job openings in Washington if you are interested in being a spokeswoman.

once again, anyone that disagrees with you is a jew-hating arab lover huh? very intelligent and mature, by the way, your not old enough to visit the recruiter, and if you are, someone errored in raising you

Should have impeached Reagan when he called the Soviet Union an evil empire and put all those nukes in Europe ...

Of course no one attacked our capital under them. This is different. Any real patriot should be asking for a global calamity so no nation ever dreams of attacking or supporting an attack on America again.

my spoint is stated, no less than i am responding to your latest accusation, you play the Jewish card again. how mature and insightful you are, everyone is a jew-basher. i dont care if Kristol is a Jew, the fact is that he doesnt have one friend in this administration nor the previous republican one, makes ya wonder huh? I guess their all anti-semitic though huh?

The President's FIRST priority is the safety and security of the American people, as he has said numerous times.

Then why doesn't he close the borders? Why has he allowed 53,000 muslims to enter this country since 911? Bush is in over his head, He doesn't know what to do or when to do it. I'll be glad when the 2004 election occurs, hopefully we will live that long.

Both George I and Weinberger were on TV this week arguing the House of Saud's case. Say, the PLO has some job openings in Washington if you are interested in being a spokeswoman

I saw the interviews. They did not argue the Saudi case as much as they stated a balanced view. I did not like it either and thought it was too Clintonian.

The fact is, that it was a example of good dipomacy. They were probably asked to do it by the administration to try to calm the waters for Powell's effort. This is what diplomacy is all about. It is ugly but necessary.

whatever, grow up, im done with you pointless accusations, your a lonely, miserable person who's only outlook in life is getting on the internet and attacking everyone in a childish, unfound manner. quite sad really

Some of the Bushites are just like the Clintonites. Thankfully Rush kept his integrity, as did many other conservatives. Bush II, if he keeps this up, will take the party down with him just like Clinton did.

Oh well said, and who exactly is the one that has been brandishing the Jewish card at anyone with a differing opinion? This is turning into one of those highly intellectual playground fights where next your going to tell me your dad is bigger than my dad right?

People like Kristol focus on what Bush and Company say publicly rather than what they do.I mean, politicians are going to say whatever they have to say in order to play the diplomacy game. Pure p.r. Big whoop.

The same Rush who stated he didnt bother to vote until 1988, if conservative principle meant so much to him then you would have thought he'd jumped at the chance to vote for Reagen. Rush is a media shill, who hold a large audience. He needs media coverage to enlarge his ratings and increase his paycheck. How else do you explain the fact that he has the answer to everything and knows how to get things done but yet, he has never put his money where his mouth is and ran for office? I guess they dont pay as well, also its not as easy to have all the answers when your responsible for enacting them.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.